Oh, puh-lease. We actually own the exact same pen linked from the article. (Mrs. Gweilo likes mystery shopping, and was given it for a shop, then told to keep it.)

It could not be any more blindingly obvious that it was anything but a pen. For one, there's the gaping maw of the lens. For another, it's clearly not a normal pen from the look of the button on the top of it. And then there's the blue light that shines on the back of it when it's recording, which I had to camouflage because it just about lights the room up. Not to mention that the pen itself is about as thick as my thumb. (It has to be, to fit a full-sized USB jack plus circuit board and power source inside the confines of the pen body.

I'd be willing to bet the other two "spy" devices are equally obvious to all and sundry.

I'm not saying proper spy gear doesn't exist, I'm just saying that very little of it is available to the public. It's *all* just as obvious as the retarded-looking Google Glass.

What I'd love to do is to make up a nickname for people who use a product that doesn't even exist yet, then pre-determine that they are bad people and nobody likes them. Then if I could harp on that for a year or so, that would be greeeeaaat.

LasersHurt:What I'd love to do is to make up a nickname for people who use a product that doesn't even exist yet, then pre-determine that they are bad people and nobody likes them. Then if I could harp on that for a year or so, that would be greeeeaaat.

Another Pretentious Nickname:I don't understand how this would be spy technology. By definition you can already see the thing you're 'spying' on. It's not x-ray vision.

Um... right?

That's what I am wondering. They discussed privacy issues in the article and I am perplexed why would you think you have privacy in the first place with someone looking right at you to begin with.

Mmm, there is only one person looking at me, so I have the privacy to scratch myself an no one will be the wiser. Oh no, he was recording and now my privacy rights were comprised. Stupid is strong with this product.

lack of warmth:Another Pretentious Nickname: I don't understand how this would be spy technology. By definition you can already see the thing you're 'spying' on. It's not x-ray vision.

Um... right?

That's what I am wondering. They discussed privacy issues in the article and I am perplexed why would you think you have privacy in the first place with someone looking right at you to begin with.

Mmm, there is only one person looking at me, so I have the privacy to scratch myself an no one will be the wiser. Oh no, he was recording and now my privacy rights were comprised. Stupid is strong with this product.

They have this places called "locker rooms" where you undress in front of strangers, perhaps even get naked. You accept that strangers will see you in your underwear or less, but that doesn't mean you'd be thrilled to learn a video of you in your granny panties has been uploaded to the internet.

But I can understand you might never have heard of such a place before.

There's always gonna be a group of folks who will use something like this regardless of fashion or social stigma. There are plenty of dbag executive types who work in the buildings around me that get smirked or snickered at when they're on a BT conference call at the drinking fountain or whatever, but those are also the dudes who couldn't care less what the people they perceive as "peons" think.

Basically the bluetooth thing looks dumb, but not everyone factors that aspect into their decision making. Some people aren't going to change their behavior because some stranger made fun of them on the street.

Meanwhile my office phone is a POS which kicks up a ton of static whenever anyone talks :(

LasersHurt:What I'd love to do is to make up a nickname for people who use a product that doesn't even exist yet, then pre-determine that they are bad people and nobody likes them. Then if I could harp on that for a year or so, that would be greeeeaaat.

BluetoothCockBlockers. Like those great BluBlocker sunglasses sold "As Seen on TV" but with added interweb cache'

lack of warmth:Another Pretentious Nickname: I don't understand how this would be spy technology. By definition you can already see the thing you're 'spying' on. It's not x-ray vision.

Um... right?

That's what I am wondering. They discussed privacy issues in the article and I am perplexed why would you think you have privacy in the first place with someone looking right at you to begin with.

Mmm, there is only one person looking at me, so I have the privacy to scratch myself an no one will be the wiser. Oh no, he was recording and now my privacy rights were comprised. Stupid is strong with this product.

I'm already working on the first Google glass privacy app that green-screens your hand out of the video so one will see you picking your nose. Anybody want to Kickfark this project? - first one million donors of $1.99 get the BOTH the left and right hand versions of the app*.

lack of warmth:Another Pretentious Nickname: I don't understand how this would be spy technology. By definition you can already see the thing you're 'spying' on. It's not x-ray vision.

Um... right?

That's what I am wondering. They discussed privacy issues in the article and I am perplexed why would you think you have privacy in the first place with someone looking right at you to begin with.

Mmm, there is only one person looking at me, so I have the privacy to scratch myself an no one will be the wiser. Oh no, he was recording and now my privacy rights were comprised. Stupid is strong with this product.

I'm already working on the first Google glass privacy app that green-screens your hand out of the video so *no* one will see you picking your nose. Anybody want to Kickfark this project? - first one million donors of $1.99 get the BOTH the left and right hand versions of the app*.

waterrockets:gweilo8888: Nightsweat: If they come out at $200 Subby will have them by 2015.

If they came out at $20 I wouldn't take one, because it's a product without an overwhelming need. (And it looks utterly idiotic.)

/not subby

Any judgement on how idiotic they look should be reserved for when a product is released. I can't believe how dense people are on the subject of how Glass looks as an R&D platform.

Whether it's still in R&D matters not one iota to how idiotic they look. Wearing prescription-free plain glasses or something that looks like glasses with the lenses missing is idiotic. Unless they change the form factor entirely -- in which case it will be a totally different product -- it is idiotic and you'll look like a vapid nerd wearing it.